Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The problem with this kind of comp is that it helps out the newer and better codexes (Eldar especially) while screwing over the old codexes with poor troops (BA).

As one of the players in that format, I would like to point out that he missed some of the stipulations that many are on this thread are also unaware of in the format.

-No First Blood rule, Slay the Warlord and Line Breaker added to round points but did not alter win/losses.
-Dedicated Transports count as part of the required points.
-Allied troop choices also count as part of the required points.
-The tournament organizer was willing to discuss any problems you had with the format.

The tournament had a pretty good turnout, and most people were not complaining about it. There were many players trying new units, and allies to make up for wholes in their lists.

The First Tournament in this format was 1500 points, and the top two players were Necrons with Flying Transports, and Ultra Marines (I think he had 40 Tactical Marines or so, with some Rhinos.)

The first one has nothing to do with the troop restriction. The second one was already assumed. The third is silly (IMO). The 4th should be obvious.

So the Ultramarine player had ~200 points of wargear on his 4 tac squads - assuming they all had Rhinos. And you don't see that as a problem? At that point people are taking options because they have to, not because they want to.

Were there any Tau players? Any Nids? 50% points in Troops is just stupid.

Not really surprising. Necron bakery spam is pretty predictable to come out on the top of such a tournament.

That or Eldar serpent spam.

rigeld2 wrote:
That or Eldar serpent spam.

I personally knocked out one of the Eldar two players in round 1, and would have in round 3 but that game didn't end up happening. I was playing Tau Empire + Farsight and shot down a tank a turn with the following unit...

3 x Crisis Suits
-Missile Pods x 6
-Marker Drones x 6
-Target Locks x 3

Commander
-Command & Control Node
-Multi-Spectrum Sensor Suite
-Drone Controller
-Pure Tide Chip
-Vectored Engines

Round 3 didn't happen?
And what were your troops?

rigeld2 wrote:
Round 3 didn't happen?
And what were your troops?

I didn't get to play the third round, due to an issue. I was running about middle of the pack with 7 of 12 points.

My Troops: 760
Kroot x 20, Sniper Rounds, Shaper
Kroot x 20, Sniper Rounds, Shaper

Crisis Suits x 3
-Missile Pods x 6
-Target Locks x 3
-Marker Drones x 6
-Bonding Ritual x 3

Crisis Suits x 2
-Fusion Blasters x 4
-Shield Generators x 2
-Shield Drones x 4
-Bonding Ritual x 2

So I actually play at the store the OP is from as well, and him and I are 2/3's of the reason they tried to ban power gamers. I tried to talk to the store owner he basically said this is how it is and if you don't like you don't have to play. It is extremely frustrating to not be able to play what you want, especially when you pay money to enter a tournament. As a result the other third of group that led to the restrictions sold off his entire 40k collection. I only own one army at this point and havnt played a game in several months.

I always hate the idea of % troops requirements in 40k as the people who suggest it often have no experience beyond one or two armies and don't see how it would impact others.

You've got orks where their basic troop choice is damn good and a 50% min is usually a standard anyway. Necrons where their troops can take flyers as dedicated transport. Than there SoB who only have one possible troop choice.

Unless 7th edition did a complete rewrite of every codex a percentage system just won't work in 40k.

 Madcat87 wrote:
I always hate the idea of % troops requirements in 40k as the people who suggest it often have no experience beyond one or two armies and don't see how it would impact others.

You've got orks where their basic troop choice is damn good and a 50% min is usually a standard anyway. Necrons where their troops can take flyers as dedicated transport. Than there SoB who only have one possible troop choice.

Unless 7th edition did a complete rewrite of every codex a percentage system just won't work in 40k.

The flgs owners intention was to stop power gamers. What he did was stop one list(fmc spam) and cause two players to sell most of their armies. I'm assuming sale decreased as well cause no one at the time wanted to try and even up there game.

 UlrikDecado wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 UlrikDecado wrote:
Changing your perspective, in some armies changing units that bear certain function?

Why is changing perspectives by saying "you're not allowed to play that army" a good thing? Shouldn't that change be driven by a desire to find new things because you actually enjoy them, not because you aren't allowed to play the army you've invested your time and effort into?

Maybe you could re-read my first post about different formats. We are talking, due to OP, about tournaments, arent we? Not everyday non-tournament games. I think its nice and fun to shuffle entry rules through year and see different army setups, classic rules included.

For the rest, again, re-read my first post, Im not fan of internet bickering "explain this...and this, explain, because I need to be in opposition!"

Dont feed the troll jajajaja; the thing is that he doen´ts understand flexibility and variety, why change or taste something different when you have your powerlist and chessy army that makes some nice auto-wins?, well if you use lots of troops you have to learn to use them wisely, they stop to being the cannon fodder, you begin to care about the little guys and learn how to squish all their potential, not to just take the op unit and just let them loose around the table making some wreck, thats why ios good to change of army or have more than one, to give some flavor to the game.

You cant tell to the people what to play, and what not, even what to use on their list (the internet and trolls and waac players, already fill that vacant perfectly jajajajaja) but neither cant force them to play with you or with your house rules, or limitations to the army selection, or with your ban list, neither a group can force you to play with them or, like the case on this post, with their restriction about the troops, i think is, if you have a problem, then speack with your group, maybe not to make dissapear the limitation, instead make new alternate ways to play, maybe you find a crazy guy as you that want to play against 3 riptides allied with a wraithknight and seers
The point is that, if oyu wanto to discuss about the way your community play, trying to fing if something right or wrong, silly or overreacted, well you only going to gather trolls and forever reppliers.
Play the way you want to play, make the limits you want, wherever you want and if you dont like it, then look for other persons to play

 anyeri wrote:
why change or taste something different when you have your powerlist, and chessy army that makes some nice auto-wins?

And what you don't seem to understand is that blanket restrictions like "50% of your points on troops" apply to ALL armies, not just the "cheesy" ones. Sure, it might prevent you from bringing 4-5 Riptides, but it's also going to rule out a lot of other lists that aren't overpowered like that. If you want to deal with certain overpowered lists then deal with them specifically, not with absurd rules that cripple a lot of other armies at the same time.

well if you use lots of troops you have to learn to use them wisely, they stop to being the cannon fodder, you begin to care about the little guys, ans learn how to squish all their potential, not to just take the op unit and just let them rount the table making some wreck.

You've got that backwards. If you have two small units of troops you have to protect them and use them wisely. If half your list is troops then you have the freedom to use them as meatshields. Just ask any IG player about meatshield platoons with 50+ bodies devoted to catching bullets to save more important units.

Finally you're also badly wrong about ruling out overpowered units. Remember Eldar Wave Serpent spam and Necron flyer spam? You know, two troops-heavy lists that would have no problem with this restriction, and actually get more overpowered because the other player has less to spend on effective counters?

Giant ball of typos

I'm ignoring the rest of your "post" because I have no idea what you're trying to say.

 Peregrine wrote:

 anyeri wrote:
why change or taste something different when you have your powerlist, and chessy army that makes some nice auto-wins?

And what you don't seem to understand is that blanket restrictions like "50% of your points on troops" apply to ALL armies, not just the "cheesy" ones. Sure, it might prevent you from bringing 4-5 Riptides, but it's also going to rule out a lot of other lists that aren't overpowered like that. If you want to deal with certain overpowered lists then deal with them specifically, not with absurd rules that cripple a lot of other armies at the same time.

well if you use lots of troops you have to learn to use them wisely, they stop to being the cannon fodder, you begin to care about the little guys, ans learn how to squish all their potential, not to just take the op unit and just let them rount the table making some wreck.

You've got that backwards. If you have two small units of troops you have to protect them and use them wisely. If half your list is troops then you have the freedom to use them as meatshields. Just ask any IG player about meatshield platoons with 50+ bodies devoted to catching bullets to save more important units.

Finally you're also badly wrong about ruling out overpowered units. Remember Eldar Wave Serpent spam and Necron flyer spam? You know, two troops-heavy lists that would have no problem with this restriction, and actually get more overpowered because the other player has less to spend on effective counters?

Giant ball of typos

I'm ignoring the rest of your "post" because I have no idea what you're trying to say.

Yeah, whatever you say

I've seen composition requirements before, but 50% is pretty wacky.

25% or 30% are both figures I've seen used in the past. I think I even saw a 40% once, at a Rogue Trader someone ran a few years ago. But half your list? That's a pretty damning restriction.

I'd probably do okay, since my lists tend to be about 50% troops anyway, but I'd feel like I cheated my way to victory.

 anyeri wrote:
Yeah, whatever you say

Well that was a very mature and constructive response. I'm glad we've had this discussion.

So, for IG in a 1500 point list with this sort of comp, I'd get a list like this.



Boy, are some people in for a gooood time. 50% on troops is a little excessive, no? It seems to gimp some armies unfairly.

Just play white scars bikers.

I think it's a cool idea.

Clearly the owner wants to change how battles are playing out, either for his benefit or for that of his customers. Suggesting sales will go down is purely guesswork as if suddenly 90% of his players stop getting roflstomped by the cutting edge tourney lists of 2/3 power gamers because they want to play more casual armies then they may get more into the game and spend more, and if they are the majority that's who he needs to appease.

He may tweak his house rules going forward, maybe adding a flyer limit to prevent bakery spam, but to me it sounds like he's just laying down the law of what kind of games he wants/thinks the majority of his players want. As I say, I think it's cool, it changes how people come to their list and makes them think outside the standard netlists.

It's a good test of a player as to whether they can pick up an army they wouldn't normally play and still come out on top instead of relying on their list to do all the heavy lifting.

Troops generally have fewer weird and wacky rules and combinations, if the store has a large proportion of newer players he may be trying to boil it down and let them learn the basics. If there's only 3 of you who power game in the store odds are the majority don't want to play like that so you either need to learn to take your opponent into account or find somewhere else to play.

 Dunklezahn wrote:
I think it's a cool idea.

Clearly the owner wants to change how battles are playing out, either for his benefit or for that of his customers. Suggesting sales will go down is purely guesswork as if suddenly 90% of his players stop getting roflstomped by the cutting edge tourney lists of 2/3 power gamers because they want to play more casual armies then they may get more into the game and spend more, and if they are the majority that's who he needs to appease.

He may tweak his house rules going forward, maybe adding a flyer limit to prevent bakery spam, but to me it sounds like he's just laying down the law of what kind of games he wants/thinks the majority of his players want. As I say, I think it's cool, it changes how people come to their list and makes them think outside the standard netlists.

It's a good test of a player as to whether they can pick up an army they wouldn't normally play and still come out on top instead of relying on their list to do all the heavy lifting.

Troops generally have fewer weird and wacky rules and combinations, if the store has a large proportion of newer players he may be trying to boil it down and let them learn the basics. If there's only 3 of you who power game in the store odds are the majority don't want to play like that so you either need to learn to take your opponent into account or find somewhere else to play.

My only problem is.... it simply doesn't work. It's forcing something on a system that doesn't want it. More importantly, 50% is a tad too much. It restricts a lot of creative lists and hard presses (and makes certain armies nigh on useless). Also, it just buffs two of the arguably more broken lists by making it harder to counter them (I'm looking at you flying bakery and eldar shield shots). And honestly neither of these lists are fun either . That being said, his tournament his choice

So this doesn't fix Wave Serpent spam and actually helps Necron flying bakery see some use again.

How does this fix anything again?

 SarisKhan wrote:
I've just realised: what about Tyranids? My friend usually starts with barely any troops on the table to let his Tervigon spawn some Termagants during the game. Forcing him to take enough 'Gants and 'Gaunts to make up at least 50% of his list would seriously affect his playing style.

30 gants is not hard

kingleir wrote:

 SarisKhan wrote:
I've just realised: what about Tyranids? My friend usually starts with barely any troops on the table to let his Tervigon spawn some Termagants during the game. Forcing him to take enough 'Gants and 'Gaunts to make up at least 50% of his list would seriously affect his playing style.

30 gants is not hard

In an 1850 list it would actually be significantly more than "30 gants".

 StarTrotter wrote:

My only problem is.... it simply doesn't work. It's forcing something on a system that doesn't want it. More importantly, 50% is a tad too much. It restricts a lot of creative lists and hard presses (and makes certain armies nigh on useless). Also, it just buffs two of the arguably more broken lists by making it harder to counter them (I'm looking at you flying bakery and eldar shield shots). And honestly neither of these lists are fun either . That being said, his tournament his choice

I certainly get where you are coming from but maybe this was try number 1, now he can look and go "Okay, list X and Y are still bastions of powergaming and steamrollering, anything I can do to curtail that for next time?" The FLG owner may not be that kind of gamer that he can see the issues he's missing/creating as clearly or mechanically.

He's running a business and if he's got 3 power gamers and 50 casual gamers he has to play to his market and keep the 50 sweet even if it means ruffling the 3's feathers.

I wouldn't really mind, because most of my points are spend on troops (crisis suits as troops ala Farsight Enclaves).

A better restriction (though it would still be a bad idea) would be "No more than 25% (or something) of your points on Heavy Support, Elites, or Fast Attack."

Don't get me wrong though, I still think that's a bad idea.

 Dunklezahn wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

My only problem is.... it simply doesn't work. It's forcing something on a system that doesn't want it. More importantly, 50% is a tad too much. It restricts a lot of creative lists and hard presses (and makes certain armies nigh on useless). Also, it just buffs two of the arguably more broken lists by making it harder to counter them (I'm looking at you flying bakery and eldar shield shots). And honestly neither of these lists are fun either . That being said, his tournament his choice

I certainly get where you are coming from but maybe this was try number 1, now he can look and go "Okay, list X and Y are still bastions of powergaming and steamrollering, anything I can do to curtail that for next time?" The FLG owner may not be that kind of gamer that he can see the issues he's missing/creating as clearly or mechanically.

He's running a business and if he's got 3 power gamers and 50 casual gamers he has to play to his market and keep the 50 sweet even if it means ruffling the 3's feathers.

A better way of handling it would be to just talk to the 3 problem players.

I tend to focus on troop heavy lists anyway. At 1500 and below I'm already spending at least 50% on troops and that seems to work out just fine for me.

Try it for awhile. See if it actually works. After a month or two it should be apparent what the impact actually is.

 Dunklezahn wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

My only problem is.... it simply doesn't work. It's forcing something on a system that doesn't want it. More importantly, 50% is a tad too much. It restricts a lot of creative lists and hard presses (and makes certain armies nigh on useless). Also, it just buffs two of the arguably more broken lists by making it harder to counter them (I'm looking at you flying bakery and eldar shield shots). And honestly neither of these lists are fun either . That being said, his tournament his choice

I certainly get where you are coming from but maybe this was try number 1, now he can look and go "Okay, list X and Y are still bastions of powergaming and steamrollering, anything I can do to curtail that for next time?" The FLG owner may not be that kind of gamer that he can see the issues he's missing/creating as clearly or mechanically.

He's running a business and if he's got 3 power gamers and 50 casual gamers he has to play to his market and keep the 50 sweet even if it means ruffling the 3's feathers.

Honestly, if it was that bad, he should have just spoken to the 3 power gamers. Along with that, it actually seems these 3 aren't the only power gamers. Somebody mentioned Necron flyer spam I believe as well as wraithserpent spam.

Anyways, I understand your point! Who knows what level this individual is? Perhaps their meta has been heavily leaned towards elite deathstars that stomp other armies so he tried to curtail it. Yes, perhaps he went far too extreme with his attempt, but as long as he learned from it and people had fun then it's honestly not that bad. Anyways, it was fun talking to you about this.

When I first started 40K, 33% troops was pretty much our rule. So a restrivction doesn't strike me as particularly crippling.

Some armies don't have troops that are quite as worthwhile, and so it will SOMEWHAT tilt the table, but not much more than NOT having the restriction. I could go either way.